Divergent COVID-19 vaccine policies: Policy mapping of ten European countries

Kessel, Robin van; Forman, Rebecca; Milstein, Ricarda; Mastylak, Alicja; Czabanowska, Katarzyna; Czypionka, Thomas; Durand‐Zaleski, Isabelle; Hirche, Anja; Krysinska-Pisarek, Magdalena; Maynou, Laia; Roberts, Bjelle; Torbica, Aleksandra; Vrangbæk, Karsten; Wang, Yuxi; Wouters, Olivier J.; Mossialos, Elías

doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.03.036

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Differences in COVID-19 vaccination policies worldwide and across European countries have been reported. 114,115 Possible reasons include epidemiological characteristics of a particular population, economic issues, health system organization, and policies. Thus, we recognize that making globally valid recommendations is complicated and that there is no single immunization schedule for worldwide use.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Management of vaccinations in patients with non‐Hodgkin lymphoma

Merli,

Costantini,

Tafuri

et al. 2024

Br J Haematol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryVaccinations are fundamental tools in preventing infectious diseases, especially in immunocompromised patients like those affected by non‐Hodgkin lymphomas (NHLs). The COVID‐19 pandemic made clinicians increasingly aware of the importance of vaccinations in preventing potential life‐threatening SARS‐CoV‐2‐related complications in NHL patients. However, several studies have confirmed a significant reduction in vaccine‐induced immune responses after anti‐CD20 monoclonal antibody treatment, thus underscoring the need for refined immunization strategies in NHL patients. In this review, we summarize the existing data about COVID‐19 and other vaccine's efficacy in patients with NHL and propose multidisciplinary team‐based recommendations for the management of vaccines in this specific group of patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Management of vaccinations in patients with non‐Hodgkin lymphoma

Merli,

Costantini,

Tafuri

et al. 2024

Br J Haematol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… 56 This contrasts with the situation in many developed nations where the latest vaccines are now routinely available, with some individuals receiving four or even five immunizations. 57 It is, therefore, arguably belatedly, time to rethink vaccine accessibility and distribution, reimagine vaccination strategies, and strive to ensure equity of immunization between nations. 58 In order to achieve 70% dual vaccine global coverage, it is axiomatic that vaccination rates must rise in low-income economies that are lagging well behind high- and middle-income countries.…”

Section: Key Control and Prevention Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Four Years Since COVID-19 Day Zero: A Time to Evaluate Past and Future Pandemic Control Policies and Practices in Sub-Saharan Africa?

Oleribe,

Taylor-Robinson,

Nwanyanwu

et al. 2024

RMHP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four years after the first case of COVID-19, the world is still determining how best to prevent and control the long-term effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) were employed at the start of the pandemic as the only available options, prior to effective vaccines and antiviral agents. The World Health Organization recommended dual vaccination for 70% worldwide as the threshold for a return to “normal” community life. Immunization rates needed to increase in all global regions, irrespective of socioeconomic status, necessitating more equitable access. During the pandemic, wealthier countries hoarded vaccine supplies even when their citizens were immunized. This highlights the already enormous difficulties in healthcare provision faced by low-income sub-Saharan African countries, which remain at risk as industrialized nations have progressed to a post-pandemic era. Thus, in addition to redoubling vaccination efforts public health policymakers should consider ongoing and future use of NPIs. In this narrative account, we advocate that various NPI practices should not be shelved; rather, more research is needed to evaluate their impact in parallel with booster vaccination. This especially applies to so-called “long COVID”. Lessons learned from implementing best practices in resource-limited settings should be incorporated into preparedness guidelines for future infectious disease outbreaks.

show abstract

“…In order to combat the epidemic, countries have actively developed COVID-19 prevention and vaccination policies. Vaccines in EU countries are uniformly reviewed by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), which authorizes vaccines from different manufacturers after a positive assessment of vaccine safety and efficacy [ 3 ]. The European Commission, on behalf of Member States, will enter into pre-purchase agreements with individual vaccine manufacturers in order for member States to have access to vaccines in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic, with the principle of distribution of vaccines among Member States on a population-based basis, ensuring equitable distribution of vaccines among Member States on a population-based basis [ 4 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The vaccination rates of Germany and Denmark are at the forefront of EU countries, while the vaccination rates of Bulgaria are at the bottom of EU countries. (2) The EU intervenes in the vaccine deployment process in the three countries, which are both EU countries, but there are differences in vaccination and epidemic control [ 3 ]. (3) These three countries are representative of the EU countries in terms of vaccination, epidemic control and economy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disparities and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccine policies in three representative European countries

Xie,

Shi,

Liu

et al. 2024

Int J Equity Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The aim of this study was to examine the Coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19) vaccine policies disparities and effectiveness in Germany, Denmark and Bulgaria, with a view to providing lessons for global vaccination and response to possible outbreak risks. Methods This study analyzed big data through public information on the official websites of the Ministries of Health of the European Union, Germany, Denmark and Bulgaria and the official websites of the World Health Organization. We systematically summarized the COVID-19 vaccine policies of the three countries, and selected the following six indicators for cross-cutting vaccination comparisons: COVID-19 vaccine doses administered per 100 people, COVID-19 vaccination rate, the share of people with fully vaccinated, the share of people only partly vaccinated, cumulative confirmed COVID-19 cases per million, cumulative confirmed COVID-19 deaths per million. Meanwhile, we selected the following four indicators for measuring the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccine policy implementation: daily cases per million, daily deaths per million, the effective reproduction rate (Rt), the moving-average case fatality rate (CFR). Results Although these three EU countries had the same start time for vaccination, and the COVID-19 vaccine supply was coordinated by the EU, there are still differences in vaccination priorities, vaccination types, and vaccine appointment methods. Compared to Germany and Denmark, Bulgaria had the least efficient vaccination efforts and the worst vaccination coverage, with a vaccination rate of just over 30% as of June 2023, and the maximum daily deaths per million since vaccination began in the country was more than three times that of the other two countries. From the perspective of implementation effect, vaccination has a certain effect on reducing infection rate and death rate, but the spread of new mutant strains obviously aggravates the severity of the epidemic and reduces the effectiveness of the vaccine. Among them, the spread of the Omicron mutant strain had the most serious impact on the three countries, showing an obvious epidemic peak. Conclusions Expanding vaccination coverage has played a positive role in reducing COVID-19 infection and mortality rates and stabilizing Rt. Priority vaccination strategies targeting older people and at-risk groups have been shown to be effective in reducing COVID-19 case severity and mortality in the population. However, the emergence and spread of new variant strains, and the relaxation of epidemic prevention policies, still led to multiple outbreaks peaking. In addition, vaccine hesitancy, mistrust in government and ill-prepared health systems are hampering vaccination efforts. Among the notable ones are divergent types of responses to vaccine safety issue could fuel mistrust and hesitancy around vaccination. At this stage, it is also necessary to continue to include COVID-19 vaccination in priority vaccination plans and promote booster vaccination to prevent severe illness and death. Improving the fairness of vaccine distribution and reducing the degree of vaccine hesitancy are the focus of future vaccination work.

show abstract

Divergent COVID-19 vaccine policies: Policy mapping of ten European countries

Cited by 11 publications

References 38 publications

Management of vaccinations in patients with non‐Hodgkin lymphoma

Management of vaccinations in patients with non‐Hodgkin lymphoma

Four Years Since COVID-19 Day Zero: A Time to Evaluate Past and Future Pandemic Control Policies and Practices in Sub-Saharan Africa?

Disparities and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccine policies in three representative European countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About